ML17266A095

LER 79-027/03L-0:on 790806,control Element Assembly 65 Dropped While Periodic Exercise Surveillance Test Was Being Performed.Caused by Apparent Design Deficiency W/Control Element Drive Sys.Procedure Change Request Submitted

ML17266A095
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	09/05/1979
From:	Schoppman M FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML17207A408	List: ML17207A407 ML17266A095
References
LER-79-027-03L, LER-79-27-3L, NUDOCS 7909260304
Download: ML17266A095 (1)

Text

NRC SORM 144 U *NUCLEAR RECVLATORY COMMISSION P Trl LtCENSEi EVcNT AEI"ORT

'Q

~4 I

IQ I 4

I ' I Q >> QIliIQ I I 9 LICa~SSS COOK I~ LICK!aSK>YVMS til L>Caa>SK TYFS 20 $7 ~a CON'T

"""MS I '

0 CAFT NUMSKR, sj QLLaia S>F ~ KYEHT OATS

'Q I~ 7$

' I '0 ASSORT OATs ADVENT OESCRItTION ANO SRObASI,E CONSECUENCES Oo While performing the. CEA Periodxc Exercise Surveillance Test, CEA 865 dropped. ACTiON per T.S. 3.1.3.1.e. was initiated and reactor poawer was reduced. CEA 865 was retrieved, operationally checked satisfactorily and returned'to normal status in 45 minutes. Reactor power was returned to 100X within 4.6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />. This is the sixth occurrence of a dropped CEA, during CEA movement, for which equipment malfunction was not the cause .

(See LERs 335-77-6, 78-20, 78-46, 1 and 79-2;)

iLi4IS LIR

. 50 1 4 9

~09 7 4 9 SY5TKM COOK lo S II hJS I

'S CAU54 C<<<<K CAU5!

5VSCOOK 11 SKOUKHTIAL l1 CCM SONKNT <<004 s IS OccUAAKNCK COMS.

SVS 00-IS AKFOAT VALVK SUSCOOK L'JS 20 AKVISION Q>

L!hlho aa>aa>

KVKNTY AA

~79 1l 11

~

11

~02 14 ASSORT 'lb.

I 7 1$

~m 17 COO!

~03 19 TYIPK

~L 20 L1I I ~0 No.

ACTION tUTUAK TAAKN Aa,TION LIRL>s Las Las 04 KFSKC CN FLAN'Y 1$

CAUSE OESCRItTION ANO CORAECa IVE ACTIONS

~

5!aUTOOaSH MKTIaoo JK

- ~

Q27

-IIOUAS 11

~

Q 40 ATTACHMKHT SUSMITTKO Las LJS 4I aM>RO>4 SAIMKCOMA.

SOAMRUS. ~ SVSSLIKA I Is I

-44 J

~ ~

iils COMSOHKN T MANUS*CTUA!A

~

The cause appears to be due to a design deficiency with the Control Element

" Drive System. 'A recent information. bulletin from the CEDS vendor details .

a possible solution during testing and recommends a sequence of operator action to be followed during future surveillance testing. A'Procedure

'hange Request has been submitted to follow this sequence.

4 9 SACILI V ~ "

~50 MKTIIOO OS

~10 OTIIKASr*TUS Qjo olscov!hv

~

STATUS I FOYIKA OISCOV!AVOKSCAISTIOH QS1 a QEQa Qa NA QQI Operator Observation 1 O'9 Io 11 44 45 . 40 ACllVITY CONTENT h!LKA540 OS AKLKASK 'MOUNTot ACTIVITY QSS LOCATION ot AKLKASKQSb NA pgg4.9~ZQss 5

~QOA IO 45 40.

t!ASOHH4L KNFOSUAKS

'NUMSKA TYSK OKSCAISTION Q<<9 r r ~00 0 IQa>

I

~LQ>

I1 IS

. NA 1 9 ~

SSASOHHKL UVUAa!5

~ia 1 4

~oo 9 II Qa I1 40

~ LCSSOSC4I OA>>ACK TO SACIUTV QAS TYSK OKM>>TIOH NA

~

~zQ41

.?. 4 4 l0 40 ~

ISSUKO~ OKSCAltr:OH 9

~

tUSUC!TY NRC USE ONLY GIB LOUlo. ~ 44 Sj !0 N~Eo>>REtAREM. A. Schoppman (305) 552-3802

~90926 0 B6'f